►
From YouTube: Planning and Housing Committee — Wednesday, May 17, 2023
Description
Planning and Housing Committee
Meeting #: 09
Date: Wednesday, May 17, 2023
Time: 9:30 am
Location: Champlain Room, 110 Laurier Avenue West, and by electronic participation
A
A
A
D
A
Thank
you
very
much
for
sorter
business.
This
is
a
public
meeting
to
consider
the
proposed
comprehensive
official
plan
in
zoning
bylaw
amendments
listed
as
5.1
to
5.4
on
today's
agenda.
For
the
items
just
mentioned,
only
those
who
make
oral
submissions
today
or
written
submissions
before
the
amendments
are
adopted.
May
appeal,
the
matter
to
the
Ontario
land
tribunal.
In
addition,
the
applicant
May
appeal
the
matter
to
the
Ontario
land
tribunal.
A
If
Council
does
not
adopt
an
amendment
within
90
days
of
receipt
of
the
application
for
zoning
bylaw,
Amendment
and
120
days
for
an
official
plan
amendment
to
submit
written
comments
on
these
amendments
prior
to
their
consideration
by
City
Council
on
May,
24
23.,
please
email
or
call
the
committee
or
Council
coordinator.
Are
there
any
Declarations
of
Interest
this
morning?
A
A
A
A
F
You,
whereas
the
city
of
city
of
Otto's,
new
official
plan,
promotes
healthy,
vibrant
walkable,
50-minute
neighborhoods
with
improved
local
amenities
and
services
and
whereas
locating
smaller
scale,
commercial
uses
such
as
limited
retail,
restaurants
and
personal
service
businesses
closer
to
where
people
live
forms
an
integral
part
of
achieving
50-minute
neighborhoods
and
whereas
section
6.2.2
of
the
official
plan
states
in
the
minor
Corridor
designation.
This
plan
shall
permit
a
mix
of
uses
which
support
residential
uses
and
the
evolution
of
a
neighborhood
towards
15-minute.
Neighborhoods
development
may
be
required.
F
We're
contextually
appropriate
to
provide
commercial
or
Surface
uses
on
the
ground
floor,
whereas
the
Fernbank
Community
design
plan
calls
for
mixed-use
development
in
this
location
and
where's.
The
built
form
of
only
live
work.
Units
proposed
by
Minto
will
not
ensure
the
delivery
of
much
needed
local
commercial
uses
for
the
Fernbank
area
and
whereas
the
land
fragmentation
that
would
occur
if
the
live
work
units
were
subdivided
and
conveyed,
would
curtail
the
delivery
of
local
commercial
for
the
future.
A
G
I,
don't
have
a
question.
I
just
want
to
say
that
it's
great
to
see
so
many
residents
advocating
who
wrote
in
to
say
that
they
want
to
see
this
kind
of
development
and
their
award.
They
want
walkable
streets
and
so
I
think
this
referral
motion
is
excellent
and
we
need
this
everywhere,
not
just
downtown.
A
Thank
you
very
much,
councilor
choster.
Anyone
else
see
no
further
questions
is
the
referral
motion
carried
carried.
Thank
you
very
much
so
with
that
we
will
move
back
to
the
top
of
the
agenda
and
the
first
item
held
is
with
respect
to
the
zoning
bylaw
Amendment
for
180,
Main,
Street
and
Alaska
the
staff
to
please
give
us
their
presentation.
H
H
So
the
subject
site
is
a
regular,
regular
interior
lot
for
hunting
on
Main
Street
located
in
the
Old
Ottawa
east
across
from
Saint
Paul
University.
The
subject
site
is
currently
occupied
by
a
two-story
single
detached
dwelling
that
will
be
demolished.
The
property
is
subject
to
Old.
Ottawa
is
secondary
plan
and
Community
design
plan
with
the
same
title
next
slide.
Please.
H
The
area
surrounding
the
site
and
Main
street
is
General
characterized
by
a
broad
mix
of
uses
and
building
typologists
typical
to
traditional
Main
Street.
It's
planning
stuff
opinion
that
the
proposal
of
a
three-story
mixed-use
building
with
five
residential
units
above
a
ground
floor,
restaurant,
consisting
of
one
Bachelor
unit,
three
one
bedroom
units
and
two
and
one
two
bedroom
municipalities,
is
consistent
with
the
established
low-rise
character
along
the
western
side
of
Main
Street
and
complements
the
existing
broad
mix
of
uses
along
traditional
Main
Street.
H
The
development
will
include
separate,
dedicated
garbage
rooms
in
the
basement,
for
both
residential
and
Commercial
uses.
A
total
of
eight
bicycle
parking
spaces
are
proposed
in
the
basement
storage
unit
as
well.
The
basement
will
be
accessible
both
by
elevator
and
stairs.
A
rare
yard
is
divided
between
residential
and
Commercial
uses.
Half
of
it
is
accessible
by
tenants
and
can
be
used
as
amenity
area.
The.
H
Area
of
the
rear
viewer,
it
is
dedicated
to
the
restaurant
as
a
decorated
feature
with
no
access
to
customers.
No
vehicle
parking
is
proposed
next
slide,
please
thank
you.
The
subject
site
is
currently
his
own
traditional
Main
Street
Zone,
Sub,
Zone
7,
with
Urban
exception,
28,
the
2182.
It
permits
a
broad
range
of
residential
and
non-residential
uses
in
a
complex
and
pedestrian-oriented
built
form,
including
restaurants
and
dwelling
units.
H
It
sets
up
a
number
of
performance
standards
as
well,
such
as
minimum
required
tour
guide,
setback,
50
of
transparent
glazing
on
the
front
facade
and
that
the
facade
facing
the
Main
Street
must
include
at
least
one
active
entrance
serving
each
residential
or
non-residential
use
occupying
any
part
of
the
ground
floor,
and
the
image
also
represents
the
pattern
of
reduced
rear
yard
setbacks
along
the
block
next
slide.
Please.
H
The
applicant
6
relief
from
existing
performance
standards
associated
with
the
traditional
Main
Street
Zone
that
will
facilitate
the
proposed
development.
It
is
the
reduced
minimum,
transparent
glazing
requirement
of
22
percent,
the
reduced
rear
yard
setback
of
4
meters
and
a
relief
for
active
entrance
for
non-residential
use
to
permit
to
be.
H
H
Relief
from
this
performance
standards,
the
graveyard
setback,
its
tough
opinion
that
the
proposed
development
is
consistent
with
the
immediate
context
of
reduced
rewards
in
the
block
and
upholds
the
intent
of
the
TM
Zone.
It's
also
apologies
and
and
the
glazing
on
the
ground
floor
and
the
facade
facing
the
Main
Street.
H
Staff
opinion
that
the
proposal
is
consistent
with
the
intent
and
policies
of
provincial
policy
statement,
official
plan,
Old
Ottawa
is
secondary
plan
and
hold
Ottawa
East
Community
design
plan
Urban
Design
guidelines
for
development
along
traditional
main
streets
and
Zoning
by
law.
Accordingly,
staff
recommends
the
zoning
below
amendment
to
be
approved.
Thank
you.
A
J
Okay,
so
Masha
thanks
for
a
great
presentation
and
I,
won't
repeat
what
Masha
has
said
so
I
want
to
speak
to
the
the
requested
changes
to
the
performance
standards
in
the
zone,
the
location
of
doors,
the
percentage
of
windows
in
the
front
facade
and
the
rear
setback.
So,
first
of
all,
just
to
orient
you
if
we
go
forward,
one
slide.
J
On
the
left,
you
see
the
existing
Sula
walk
building
so
and
on
the
and
the
subject
site
marked
with
the
star
on
the
right.
You
see
the
proposed
new
build
out
the
proposed
new
development,
so
the
right
hand,
image
the
left
hand.
Half
of
it
is
the
existing
Sula
walk
building
and
we
intend
to
expand
the
the
building
to
the
right
to
so
it.
It
will
end
up
looking
like
one
larger
building,
but
it's
really
sort
of
two
buildings
touching
each
other.
J
J
He
he
and
his
wife
run
the
sulawalk
restaurant,
which
is
in
the
ground
floor
of
the
existing
building
and
they'd
like
to
expand
and
build
this
additional
building
beside
and
joined.
So
they
can
move
the
restaurant
to
the
new
ground
floor,
they're
changing
their
business
model
so
that
it's
not
just
a
sort
of
pick
up
and
take
away,
but
they'd
like
to
have
eat
in
they'd,
also
like
to
welcome
cultural
activities
into
their
space
and
they're,
really
embedded
and
active
in
their
community.
J
So
it
will
allow
them
a
lot
more
opportunities.
This
new
business
model
does
require
more
space
and
there's
a
limit
to
the
the
width
of
the
site,
and
so
in
order
to
have
to
meet
the
needs
of
their
restaurant
function,
they
need
a
bit
more
ground
floor
space
and
that
produces
that
rear
yard
setback
reduction
request.
J
J
To
walk
past,
to
be
eye-catching
and
to
draw
people
in
the
floor-to-ceiling
height
is,
is
quite
high,
and
so,
when
you
calculate
the
percentage
glazing
on
the
front
facade,
it
came
to
only
20
or
21,
whereas
50
is
required,
but
I
think
you
can
see
from
looking
at
it.
It
is
quite
glassy
and
it
does
meet
that
intent
of
having
interesting
Windows
to
look
into.
So
the
point
of
the
the
bylaw
requirement
is
to
have
a
really
great
facade
that
people
want
to
to
look
in.
They
want
to
be
engaged.
J
The
the
sill
level
of
those
windows
allows
them
to
be
service,
Windows,
which
is
just
a
really
great
function,
so
they
will
still
be
serving.
People
who
are
are
just
coming
to
pick
up
their
food
and
they
have
a
thriving
Business
Delivery
business
as
well.
So
the
there
could
be
more
glazing
if
those
seals
were
lower,
but
it's
actually
quite
functional
at
the
height
of
the
Rat.
J
J
J
It's
very
visually
eye-catching
from
the
sidewalk
on
at
that
angle,
and
it
it's
angled
in
such
a
way
that
it
allows
lots
of
space
for
people
to
stand
there
with
without
impeding
the
the
flow
of
pedestrian
traffic.
Then
you
also
see
there
there's
a
little
alleyway
and
this
Alleyway
I'll
show
you
the
3D
images.
Next,
it's
intended
to
to
mimic
an
Asian
Alleyway.
It
will
be
very
decorated
and
welcoming
and
interesting
the
the
intent
is
for
it
to
be
a
destination
on
this
street
and
to
animate
the
street.
J
B
A
If
members
have
questions
you'll
be
able
to
get
to
that,
but
we
are
okay
for
the
presentation.
I
do
appreciate.
Thank
you
very
much
for
us
on
the
the
focus
on
why
this
isn't
just
as
of
right
and
the
the
changes
that
you
are
looking
for
in
the
justification.
That's
greatly
appreciated
in
the
presentation.
Thank
you.
Councilman
thanks.
K
So
much
chair,
thank
you.
Roslyn
for
the
presentation
and
I
know:
you've
worked
heavily
with
our
office
on
this
application.
I'm
supportive
of
it
I
just
on
the
rear
yard
set
pack.
I
know
you
wanted
to
get
to
that.
I
do
want
to
hear
from
you
on
that
piece.
I!
Think!
That's
the
piece
that
that
the
community
is
most
concerned
about
is
just
the
trees
in
the
back
and
the
the
the
Main
Street
the
rear
yards
there
on
Main
Street
and
maintaining
that
tree
canopy.
J
J
J
There
are
a
lot
of
weed
trees
along
that
back
property
line
and
we'll
continue
to
to
work
with
our
our
neighbors
to
manage
the
trees
that
exist
along
the
back
there
and
the
the
there
may
be
some
constraints
to
do
with
soils
and
the
proximity
of
roots
to
to
buildings
because
of
the
potential
for
marine
soil.
That
doesn't
mean
that
we
can't
have
trees
and
and
continue
to
Steward
trees
along
the
rear
lot
line.
A
L
I
will,
like
I,
said
refer
you
to
the
letter,
I'd
like
to
start
by
saying
that
we
have
really
welcomed
sulamok
to
to
Sula
walk
sorry
to
the
community.
We
think
they've
made
a
great
addition
to
Main
Street
to
the
Vitality
of
Main
Street
to
the
interesting
food
options
on
Main
Street
and
we're
excited
like
Rosalind
about
what
they're
proposing
to
do
in
expanding
and
we
welcome
their
expansion.
So
we
support
the
application,
with
the
notable
exception
of
the
request
for
the
reduced
rear
yard
setback.
L
We
have
strong
objections
to
the
reduced
rear
yard
setback
as
I
think
you
all
know.
We
have
an
Old
Ottawa
East
Secondary
plan
that
was
developed
over
a
few
years
through
considerable
work
between
the
community
and
the
city,
and
that
secondary
plan
calls
for
rear
yard
setbacks
to
be
implemented
through
the
zoning
bylaws.
So
that's
basically
official
policy
now
and
we're
asking
that
that
be
respected
and
that
you
ensure
it
has
teeth
the
rear
yard.
Setbacks
are
really
important
in
our
community.
L
For
a
few
reasons,
the
applicant
has
argued
that
in
this
case
the
reduced
rear
yard
setback
is
going
to
be
consistent
with
what's
going
on
along
Main
Street,
because
there
are
other
reduced
rear
yard
setbacks
along
Main
Street
well
by
our
calculation.
In
fact
of
the
10
buildings
along
that
strip,
only
three
have
reduced
rear
yard
setbacks.
So
it's
certainly
not
a
majority
by
any
means.
L
Two
of
those
were
built
prior
to
the
implementation
of
the
secondary
plan,
so
they
weren't,
subject
obviously
to
the
secondary
plan
rules.
One
of
them
was
the
reduction
of
the
reduced.
Rear
yard
is
compensated
for
to
a
certain
degree
by
the
fact
that
it
was
the
Second
Story
and
third
story
are
the
45
degree
angular
plane
setback.
So
in
terms
of
massing
in
terms
of
overlooking
privacy
with
neighbors,
there's
not
the
issue
there,
despite
the
reduced
rear
yard
setback.
L
So
basically
we
would
argue
we
would
take
issue
with
what
the
applicant
and
what
Pratt
have
said
about
about
the
reduced
rear
yard
setback
in
this
case
being
consistent
with
what
else
is
happening
on
that
side
of
Main
Street
and
the
negative
implications,
there
are
implications
for
the
privacy
of
neighbors,
the
Overlook,
the
loss
of
sun,
potentially
Etc,
so
for
rear
yard.
Neighbors,
that's
a
big
impact,
but
the
biggest
impact
that
we're
concerned
about
is
the
lack
of
soft
landscaping
and
soil
mass.
L
That
would
allow
for
a
real
tree
canopy
for
trees
not
only
to
exist
but
to
thrive,
and
the
city
has
set
an
aspirational
and
very
admirable
goal
of
more
trees
in
the
city.
The
city
has
recognized
the
importance
of
trees
to
Citizens
health
and
well-being
to
mitigating
climate
change,
so
trees,
I
think
we
all
agree.
Trees
are
fundamentally
important
and
the
city
has
acknowledged
that
even
in
urban
neighborhoods,
the
tree
canopy
is
extremely
important
on
both
private
and
public
property,
so
ensuring
that
prescribed,
rear
yards
are
enforced.
L
K
It
is
important
to
maintain
that
and
obviously,
if
every
development
was
built,
this
way
with
the
rear
yard
step
back
that
way,
we
would
lose
all
those
rear,
yard,
trees
and
I.
Think
that's
that's
the
concern
main
concern
so
in
terms
of
the
discussions
with
the
applicant
about
maintaining
a
tree
back
there,
because
I
understand
there's
a
tree
to
be
removed,
I'm
wondering
if
those
have
been
fruitful
around
other
medical
mitigatory
measures
that
could
allow
for
perhaps
raised
soil
beds
for
a
tree
and
actual
growth
back
there.
A
A
A
K
It's
the
same
with
the
the
the
garbage
and
waste
the
relief
for
the
parking
provision
was
was
eliminated
and
I
appreciate
that
you
know,
there's
no
requirement
to
provide
parking
for
the
development
and
I
think
in
this
area.
It's
very
walkable
community
and-
and
this
type
of
development
is
needed
here
and
welcomed
here,
and
so
you
know
I'm
in
support
of
it.
K
I
I
do
agree
with
the
Community
Association
around
the
the
rear
yard
and
that
tree
canopy,
and
that
we
need
to
maintain
not
as
much
as
possible
I
think
in
these
cases,
where
perhaps
there's
a
difference
of
a
foot
or
two
to
to
create
that
that
tree
canopy
growth
in
the
back.
That's
where
I
hope
that
in
the
future,
we
can
come
to
some
more
conclusions
that
allow
for
still
treat
growth
while
allowing
for
this
type
of
development
to
proceed.
K
A
A
M
Okay,
good
morning,
chair
and
members
of
the
committee
I'm
Kelly
Livingstone,
a
planner
with
the
East
development
review,
team
and
I'm
here
to
present
to
you
the
details
of
the
proposed
learning
bylaw
Amendment
at
2504,
White
Street,
which
proposes
to
raise
on
the
lands
to
permit
for
the
development
of
Townhouses
next
slide.
Please.
M
The
subject
site
is
shown
on
the
slide
in
red.
It
is
located
in
Orleans
South
within
the
Eastern
East
urban
community.
The
subject
lands
are
shown
on
the
slide
and
are
located
just
south
of
Renault
Road
between
Fern
Casey,
Street
and
White
Street.
Next
slide.
Please
we'll
get
a
bit
of
a
closer
view
here
shown
on
the
slide.
M
Is
an
air
photo
and,
oh
sorry,
the
subject
site
has
about
11
meters
of
Frontage
to
Renault
Road,
30
meters
of
Frontage,
to
White
Street,
to
the
East
and
about
74
meters
of
Frontage
to
a
small
triangular
priest
parcel
land
which
abuts
the
future
extension
of
fern
Casey
wrote.
The
site
is
about
0.8
hectares
in
size.
Next
slide
shown
on
the
slide.
Are
some
photos
of
the
site
on
the
left?
Are
some
street
view
photos
of
the
Renault
and
White
Street
Frontage
on
the
bottom?
M
Right
is
an
identification
of
the
the
sighting
kind
of
a
3D
View.
You
can
see
the
site
is
heavily
treed
and
there
is
an
existing
single
detached
house
with
Frontage
to
White
Street,
as
shown
on
the
bottom
left,
photo
it's
a
little
tricky
to
see
if
it's
Brown
and
Brown
there
next
slide
there
and
the
official
plan.
The
subject.
Lands
are
designated
neighborhood
area
and
are
within
the
Suburban
use.
Transect
next
slide,
please.
M
M
The
concept
plan
for
the
site
is
shown
on
the
slide.
The
proposed
development
aims
to
redevelop
the
Western
portion
of
the
property
only
while
maintaining
the
existing
condition,
with
the
exact
existing
detached
dwelling
along
White
Street.
For
the
area
to
be
developed
in
the
west,
the
applicant
proposes
a
planned
unit,
development
with
four-ton
housebox.
Two
of
these
townhouse
blocks
are
proposed
as
standard
townhouses
at
six
meters.
So
about
two
stories.
Tall
and
further
west
are
two
and
a
half
storage
stock.
Townhouse
blocks
proposed
at
around
8
meters
tall.
M
The
planned
unit
development
will
have
vehicular
access
from
Renault
Road
and
will
provide
all
required
parking
under
the
zoning
bylaw,
including
visitor
parking,
which
is
generated
by
the
stock.
Townhouse
use
there's
also
an
amenity
space
proposed
to
the
back
with
Landscaping
as
well.
Next
slide,
please.
M
M
N
M
There
are
also
exception:
Provisions
proposed
with
the
zoning
Amendment
exceptions,
one
two
and
three
are
for
the
R1
e
Zone
and
they
are
to
formalize
the
existing
site
and
existing
accessory
dwellings
and
the
R1
e
Zone
you'll
see
there
to
slightly
increase
the
permitted
size
and
height
of
the
existing
accessory
structure
and
slightly
Reduce
by
one
meter.
The
rear
guide,
setback,
exceptions,
four
and
five
are
to
permit
stack
dwellings
in
the
r3z
zone
while
limiting
maximum
height
to
11
meters.
This
is
the
same
as
the
permitted
height
of
Townhouses
in
this
Zone.
M
While
there
are
some
differences
in
building
design
between
stock
belongings
and
townhouse
flowings
by
limiting
height
the
potential
impact
of
this
additional
use
is
minimized.
Lastly,
exception:
six
is
to
reduce
the
minimum
lot
width
that
accounts
for
the
narrow
Frontage
to
Renault
road,
which
is
about
11.2
meters,
as
I've
said,
and
then
exception.
Seven
is
to
slightly
reduce
setbacks.
Only
along
the
east
and
west
interior
side
yards
and
it's
a
minor
reduction
on
the
East
Side
by
one
meter,
which
impacts
the
existing
dwelling
to
the
East
and
then
the
reduction
from
six
to
threes.
M
Only
along
the
west
inferior
side,
Lot
line
which
abuts
the
vacant
parcel
and
the
future
extension
of
fern
Casey.
Now
all
other
provisions
and
requirements,
however,
of
the
zoning
ballot,
will
still
apply
next
slide.
Please,
finally,
there's
a
proposed
holding
provision
on
the
site.
What
this
means
is
that,
before
any
development
is
permitted,
the
requirements
of
the
hold
must
be
met
and
they're
shown
in
the
slide
in
English
and
French.
The
first
is
that
a
consent
application
may
be
approved,
severing
the
two
properties
along
the
zoning.
M
Line
This
is
required
to
ensure
the
single
detached
home
remains
along
White,
Street,
maintaining
that
character
and
to
ensure
the
other
parcel
may
be
developed
independently.
The
second
tour
to
ensure
full
Municipal
services
to
the
site,
the
applicant
has
demonstrated
that
the
site
can
be
serviced
fully
with
sanitary
and
storm
water
infrastructure.
It's
already
serviced
by
water,
but
work
must
be
done
to
extends.
M
M
In
conclusion,
staff's
recommendation
is
shown
on
the
slide
staff
find
the
proposal
to
represent
compatible
intensification
and
keeping
with
transact
and
neighborhood
official
plan
policies,
a
c
to
intensify
the
built-up
area
and
provide
more
housing
and
compatible
residential
forms.
The
proposal
demonstrates
the
density,
that's
consistent
with
requirements
of
the
official
plans,
growth
management
framework
and
the
East
Urban
Phase
2
Community
design
plan.
Therefore,
we
recommend
approval
of
the
rezoning.
Thank
you.
A
I
Okay,
great
so
good
morning,
chair
and
committee
members,
my
name
is
Patricia
Warren
and
I'm,
a
planner
with
Photon
planning
and
design
representing
the
owner
of
2504
White
Street
for
the
zoning
bylaw
Amendment
application
in
front
of
you
today.
Next
slide,
please
so
this
slide
Kelly
did
just
go
over
the
proposed
development,
so
you
won't
spend
too
much
time
on
this
slide.
I
The
one
thing
that
I
would
flag,
though,
is
that
the
the
parking
as
a
vehicular
parking
will
be
provided
for
all
of
the
units,
the
parking
for
the
townhouse
dwellings,
the
standard
townhouse
dwellings
will
be
accommodated
in
private
driveways,
while
the
parking
for
the
stock
dwellings
will
be
provided
in
the
surface
parking
lot
and
that
surface
parking
lot
is
located
internal
to
the
site.
Next
slide,
please.
I
I
I
Could
we
just
flip
back
to
the
zoning
bylaw
slide?
Thank
you
so,
as
outlined
in
the
stop
presentation,
the
extreme
zoning
on
the
site
is
development
Reserve,
which
recognizes
lands
intended
for
future
Urban
Development
as
a
result
of
the
existing
zoning.
Any
future
development
on
the
subject
site
would
be
required
to
proceed
with
the
zoning
bylaw
Amendment,
as
outlined
in
the
community
design
plan
for
this
area.
I
I
As
part
of
the
proposed
development,
the
site
will
need
to
be
rezoned
to
two
separate
zones,
one
for
the
existing
single
detached
dwelling
and
one
for
the
proposed
development
itself.
Three
amendments
to
the
r1e
zone
are
requested
for
the
existing
single
detached
dwelling.
A
reduction
of
the
rear
yard
setback
is
requested
to
accommodate
a
future
lot
line
that
will
separate
the
existing
dwelling
and
the
proposed
development.
A
future
consent.
Application
to
Southern
lands
will
require
the
sites
to
be
zoning
compliant
and,
as
such,
the
proposed
amendment
will
ensure
the
zoning
compliance.
I
An
increase
to
the
maximum
height
and
size
of
an
accessory
building
is
also
requested.
The
accessory
building
on
the
site
is
an
existing
structure
and
this
amendment
is
requested
to
bring
the
structure
into
compliance
with
the
zoning
bylaw.
No
changes
are
proposed
to
the
existing
accessory
structure.
I
Four
amendments
to
the
r3z
zone
are
requested
for
the
proposed
residential
development
as
stock
dwellings
are
not
a
permitted
use
within
the
r3z
Zone.
It
is
requested
that
stock
dwellings
be
permitted
on
the
site.
The
original
proposed
Zoning
for
the
site
in
our
original
submission
was
r4z,
which
would
have
permitted
the
stock
dwellings
as
well
as
low-rise
Apartments,
but
through
discussions
with
City
staff
and
after
reviewing
the
comments
from
the
community,
The
Proposal
was
revised
to
an
r3z
zone,
so
low-rise
Apartments
would
not
be
permitted
on
their
site.
I
A
maximum
billing
height
of
11
meters
is
proposed
for
the
stock
dwellings,
which
is
consistent
with
the
maximum
Building
height
of
the
standard
townhouses.
The
height
for
the
stock
dwellings
will
ensure
that
the
maximum
Building
height
is
the
same
as
the
townhouses
and
and
the
same
across
the
site
for
both
dwelling
types.
I
It's
also
requested
that
the
minimum
required
lot
width
be
reduced
to
recognize
the
existing
lock
configuration,
as
was
part
of
the
proposed
development
and
through
future
consent
application.
The
front
lot
line
for
the
site
will
be
along
Renault
Road
and,
as
Kelly
had
mentioned,
the
watt
width
is
approximately
11
meters,
it's
11.2
meters
and
will
extend
for
a
depth
of
approximately
46
meters
before
reaching
the
portion
of
the
site
to
be
developed
and
where
there
is
a
distance
of
approximately
a
107
meters.
I
Between
the
eastern
and
western
property
lines,
finally,
a
reduction
of
the
East
and
West
interior
side
yards
are
requested.
The
East
Side
Yardville,
but
the
future
lot
line
that
separates
the
proposed
development
from
the
existing
dwelling.
The
proposed
interior
side
yard
of
5
meters,
combined
with
the
proposed
rear
yard
of
11
meters,
will
provide
for
an
appropriate
setback
between
the
existing
dwelling
and
the
proposed
townhouse
block.
I
The
interior
side
yard,
set
back
to
the
West,
is
reduced
to
three
meters
as
the
property
of
bus
lands
that
are
not
expected
to
be
developed.
The
proposed
buildings
location
closer
to
the
West
property
line,
is
intended
to
frame
the
fern
Casey
Street
extension
and
is
treated
more
as
a
front
yard
condition
as
compared
to
a
side
yard
condition.
30.
A
A
A
O
Morning,
council,
members
and
chair,
my
name
is
Jean
siguain,
my
wife
and
I
are
the
owners
of
the
property
at
2508,
White
Street,
which
is
just
adjacent
to
the
south
of
2504
White
Street.
If
you
could
show
the
slide,
please
let
me
start
by
saying
that
we
understand
the
importance
of
intensification
and
we
are
in
favor
of
development.
We're
also
focused
on
the
importance
of
development
that
is
appealing
to
an
existing
neighborhood
and
to
the
preservation
of
mature
trees,
in
line
with
the
city
of
ottawa's
Urban
Tree
canopy
policy.
O
Having
said
that,
we
have
concerns
about
the
relief
that
is
being
sought
for
the
built
form
on
and
the
setback
reliefs
being
proposed
for
area
B
of
2504
White
Street.
Our
goal
here
today
is
to
present
some
of
those
concerns
and
make
recommendations
to
mitigate
the
negative
consequences.
This
rezoning
proposal
could
have
in
area
B
of
the
site
where
the
Pod
is
planned.
O
In
the
first
round
of
the
rezoning
proposal,
the
applicant
was
seeking
a
zoning
amendment
to
r4z
with
a
proposed
site
layout,
with
a
total
of
24
units
of
stacked,
townhouses
and
regular
townhouses
in
the
second
round.
The
application
changed
the
zoning
Amendment
proposal
to
r3z,
but
is
now
seeking
a
relief
to
allow
stacked
townhouses
and
is
keeping
the
exact
same
proposed
site
layout
of
24
units.
O
This
proposal
leads
to
the
same
level
of
intensification,
which
is
incompatible
with
the
character
of
the
surrounding
neighborhood.
Appealing
Urban
Design
calls
for
a
gradual
transition
form
from
one
built
form
to
another.
In
this
particular
case,
all
the
properties
surrounding
the
proposed
bud
are
single
detached
homes.
Building
townhouses
close
to
single
detached
homes
is
a
logical
step
in
build
form
transition.
O
However,
going
from
single
detached
homes
to
stock
townhouses
is
a
drastic
change
in
the
build
form.
We
find
that
the
proposed
Bud
development
is
excessive
in
Mass
height
and
bulk,
and
is
therefore
incompatible
with
the
established
physical
character
of
the
neighborhood,
including
from
a
backyard
point
of
view.
A
budding
Property
Owners
bought
their
property
with
a
single
detached
within
a
single
detached
home
area,
not
just
for
its
Frontage
appeal,
but
for
its
backyard
appeal
as
well.
O
We
believe
the
impact
of
the
sac
townhouse
issues
are
serious
for
abutting
property
owners
and
ask
that
planning
committee
members
reject
the
requested
relief
for
stacked
townhouses
on
this
parcel
of
land.
When
voting
on
this
proposal,
if
the
Pod
site
layout
was
made
up
of
Townhouses
exclusively,
there
would
perhaps
be
a
total
of
16
units
built
instead
of
24..
O
O
It's
now
adjacent
to
the
South
property
and
having
the
possibility
of
a
few
more
visitor
parking
spots
to
reduce
overflow
parking
on
adjacent
streets.
As
for
our
concerns
for
the
side
yard
setback
reliefs
being
sought,
We
Believe
approving
these
reliefs
would
have
a
negative
impact
on
the
Pud
residents
themselves.
With
the
townhouses
along
the
west
property
line
residents,
there
would
have
a
mere
three
meters
of
space
in
their
backyard,
eliminate
eliminating
all
side
yard
setback.
Reliefs
being
sought
would
improve
the
quality
of
the
surroundings.
O
For
the
residents
and
once
again
open
the
door
for
the
retention
of
more
trees,
which
leads
to
a
reduced
carbon
footprint.
Finally,
we're
also
concerned
about
the
lack
of
any
mention
about
having
fencing
and
year-round
natural
buffer
between
the
Pud
and
the
existing
abutting
property
Residential
Properties.
O
A
A
P
M
M
M
Okay,
thank
you.
So
the
waste
the
applicant
has
shown
the
waste
kind
of
pickup
area
at
the
South
End
of
the
site.
It's
a
little
tricky
to
see,
but
there
there
are
two
kind
of
small
circles.
Next
to
the
stack
dwellings
to
the
south
of
the
parking
area,
so
that
waste
area
it
would
be
required
to
be
screened
under
the
zoning.
Bylaw
I
believe
it's
a
two
meter
high
screen
approximately
from
abundant
uses,
but
it's
it's
at
the
South
End.
If
that
answered
your
question.
P
E
Thank
you
I.
Remember
someone
saying
earlier
that
the
the
two
blocks
of
stacked
townhouses
abutting,
what
is
going
to
become
Fern
Casey,
is
built
a
little
shorter
to
to
kind
of
match
match
the
other
townhouses.
Are
you
able
to
give
that
in
meters
like
what
is
the
height
of
the
two
blocks
of
regular
townhouses
versus
the
height
of
the
two
blocks
of
Staff.
M
Thanks
chair
under
the
zoning
bylaw
Amendment,
one
of
the
exception,
Provisions
that
are
included,
is
to
ensure
the
maximum
height
of
these
stock.
Townhouses
are
11
meters
and
so
that
limits
the
maximum
height
to
this,
the
same
standard
as
townhouses,
so
the
stock
and
the
townhouses
will
have
the
same
maximum
height
as
proposed
on
the
plan
by
the
applicant.
The
townhouses
are
two
stories:
six
meters
tall,
assuming
a
three
meter
and
a
pipe
per
floor,
and
then
stock
townhouses
are
two
and
a
half
meters
or
two
and
a
half
stories.
E
Okay,
and
the
second
question
is
the
holding
symbol-
is
contingent
on
Municipal
servicing
and
I
noticed
that
on
service
auto,
where
there's
a
water
main
before
the
sewer
I
have
a
property.
In
my
my
ward,
that's
that
has
a
similar
holding
symbol
that
has
some
challenges
getting
to
the
Sewer
connection.
To
do
the
I
guess:
do
you
or
the
applicants
receive
any
sort
of
challenges
accessing
that
sewer,
underneath
or
above
that
water
main
all.
M
Right,
thank
you
chair.
It's
challenging
for
me
to
comment
on
servicing
matters
as
a
planner.
Perhaps
the
applicant
would
have
response
if
Patricia
is
still
still
on
the
call.
I
would
say
it
has
been
reviewed
and
extension
on
that
sanitary
sewer
would
have
to
occur
along
or
no
Road
I
believe
to
the
property
Frontage,
and
they
would
connect
through
the
at
that
Frontage
down
to
the
the
putt
as
proposed,
but
I'll
allow
Patricia
to
perhaps
elaborative.
C
Q
Thank
you
for
this.
The
argument
that
the
the
compatibility
someone's
trying
to
call
me
the
compatibility
everything's
ringing
here
argument
is
one
that
I
you
know
I'm
generally
sympathetic
to
in
Canada.
We
have
a
lot
of
this.
We
have
single-family
homes,
then
we
have
stock
towns.
We
have
a
lot
of
that.
There's
usually
a
bigger
distance,
though
so
to
the
delegation's
point
that
the
separations
or
whether
it's
fencing
or
anything,
is
that
something
that
still
has
to
be
worked
out
in
site
plan.
What
that
would
look
like
to
divide
everybody
up.
M
M
Fencing
of
course,
is
approved
through
site
plan
and
and
evaluate
in
that
way,
How
Can
Landscaping
be
used
to
buffer
as
well.
Those
are
all
considerations
that
we
would
certainly
look
at
through
site
plan
in
order
to
ensure
it's
it's
as
compatible
as
possible.
There's
only
so
much
I
think
a
zoning
bylaw
amendment
can
do
there's
the
site
plan
is
kind
of
an
important
consideration
for
sure.
M
Q
You,
okay,
that's
helpful,
I
mean
I
just
want
to
make
sure
that's
clear
to
everybody.
There
is
still
more
to
come.
Just
I
know
that
we
as
counselors
don't
have
a
lot
of
authority
oversight
plan,
but
I
think
you
know,
Community
can
work
pretty
well
with
the
developers.
We've
always
found
that
in
Canada
the
developers
are
always
willing
to
work
closely
with
especially
the
neighboring
Community
Association
or
whoever
Community
condo
Court.
This
is
maybe
one
neighbor
but
can
be
done.
The
other
thing
is
I
would
ask.
Q
Were
there
other
designs
submitted
first
I'm
thinking
about
this.
This
application
in
Kanata,
where
that
holding
provision
for
the
water
never
worked
out.
It
never
ends.
They
had
many
designs,
they
went
back
and
forth
and
back
and
forth,
eventually
they've
scrapped
the
entire
thing
and
I'm
not
sure
what
the
status
is
right
now.
So
it's
a
real
thing
that
if
that
doesn't
work,
it
may
not
go
forward
at
all,
but
are
there
other
design
options
right
now.
M
All
right,
thank
you,
chair
no
other
design
options
were
presented.
As
the
applicant
mentioned.
They
did
come
in
with
a
proposal
for
an
r4z
Zone
which
presented
issues
because
I
would
prevent
for
a
low-rise
apartment
building,
but
as
it
stands,
this
is
primarily
the
design
we've
We've
looked
at
and
evaluated.
Okay.
Q
Okay,
it's
something
to
think
about,
though
you
never
know
if
this
will
actually
go
forward.
I
will
just
make
the
other
comment
that
you
know
we
in
Canada
have
had
applications
go
forward
where
the
the
conditions
are
wholly
inappropriate,
and
you
know
when
I
look
at
the
other
designs
of
Kanata.
It
isn't
inappropriate
to
have
town
homes
near
other
homes.
It's
always
just
about
that
separation.
Q
M
R
R
So
it
feels
a
bit
out
of
our
control.
But
what
does
what
is
within?
Our
control
is
acknowledging
the
lack
of
Mobility
options
in
this
area,
insisting
on
commercial
where
possible,
like
counselor
gowers
motion
today,
I
thought
that
was
excellent,
wholly
supportive
of
that
approach,
and
this
evening
I'm
going
to
the
OC
Transpo
root
review
session
and
where
I'm
urging
staff
to
consider
opportunity
not
only
current
ridership
when
we're
looking
at
at
those
root
reviews.
R
A
S
All
right
good
morning,
chair
members
of
committee
staff
and
members
of
the
public,
my
name
is
Lucy
Ramirez
and
I'm.
The
planner
and
the
file
lead
for
the
zoning
bile
Amendment
at
1568.
Meadowbrook
Road
next
slide,
please
so
the
subject
site
is
in
the
Pineview
neighborhood
and
has
Frontage
on
Meadowbrook
Road,
the
property
about
to
detach
dwelling
to
the
west
and
a
townhouse
condominium
CC
70
to
the
east.
The
rear
lot
line,
abuts
Max
us
Municipal
owned
Park
vaccine
Park
next
slide,
please.
S
So
the
site
is
presently
occupied
by
detached
dwelling
in
a
detached
garage.
I
pointed
a
or
I've
placed
a
flag
kind
of
icon.
To
show
you
where
the
property
is
the
streetscape
along
Meadowbrook.
Road
is
characterized
by
a
mix
of
dwelling
types
which
is
reflective
of
the
zoning,
and
there
is
open
space
along
Meadowbrook
Road
further
to
the
South
Sevierville
Park
and
Meadowbrook
Park.
So
Blair
station
is
northeast
of
the
site.
It's
a
walking
distance
of
approximately
one
kilometer,
a
14-minute
walk.
Those
two
towers
that
you
see
in
photo.
S
Four
with
the
arrow
just
above
them
are
a
good
visual
marker
for
the
location
of
the
transit
station,
so
the
subject
properties
dits
out
just
outside
the
Blair
Transit
oriented
Development
Area,
specifically
the
South
sector,
which
includes
properties
within
an
800
meter,
walk
from
the
station
platform.
Next
slide,
please.
S
S
So
this
side
is
a
comparison
between
the
r1ww
zone
and
the
R2.
The
proposed
Zone,
the
r2n,
with
an
urban
exception
as
of
right
within
the
r1ww
Zone,
the
property
could
be
severed
into
three
lots
and
three
detached
dwellings
could
be
constructed.
Post,
Bill,
23
and
additional
two
units
could
be
built
per
lot
for
a
total
of
nine
units
constructed
on
the
property.
S
S
The
proposed
dwellings
maintain
the
character
of
the
neighborhood
and
Zoning
terms,
such
as
building
setbacks
as
a
setbacks
in
the
R1
ww
Zone
and
the
R2
and
urban
exception
Zone
will
remain
the
same.
The
height
is
increasing
from
8.5
to
9
meters.
However,
the
zoning
will
restrict
the
building
form
to
two
stories.
Next
slide,
please.
S
S
It's
residential
East
building
that
contains
two
principal
dwellings,
they're
arranged
one
behind
the
other,
long
semi-detached,
swellings
fit
on
narrower
narrower
lot
widths
and
those
are
than
those
that
are
required
for
traditional
side-by-side
buildings
and
typically
alongside
detached
Welling
needs
only
one
driveway
that
accesses
a
shared
parking
area.
In
this
case,
there
are
four
alongside
attached:
dwellings
adjacent
to
each
other,
and
the
shared
driveways
serve
four
principal
dwellings.
Next
slide,
please.
S
S
That
being
said,
critical
elements
such
as
soft
Landscaping
in
the
front
yard,
amenity
space
in
the
front
and
rear
yards,
a
shared
driveway,
vehicular
parking
internal
to
the
site,
bicycle
parking,
dedicated
pedestrian
walkways
and
Waste
Management
areas
are
being
proposed
next
slide,
please
so
I've
evaluated
this
against
the
council,
approved
official
plan
and
The
Proposal
complies
with
the
following
policies.
Within
the
urban
area.
The
plan
is
to
support
growth
and
we
have
a
target
of
47
within
the
area
that
was
built
up
as
of
July
1st
2018..
S
So
the
site
is
well
connected
to
a
mix
of
land
uses
where
daily
and
weekly
needs
can
be
accessed
within
a
15-minute
walk.
So
this
includes
shop,
Services,
Foods,
schools,
employment,
green
spaces
parks
and
Pathways
in
the
image
I've
identified,
the
property
schools,
commercial,
plazas
and
parks
and
green
spaces
are
in
the
green
little
bubbles.
Generally.
The
official
plan
equates
15-minute
neighborhood
to
a
900
meter,
radius
or
1
200
meters
on
The
Pedestrian
Network
next
slide,
please.
S
This
is
a
visual
breakdown
of
the
units.
There
are
eight
principal
dwellings
proposed
and
there
are
eight
secondary
dwelling
units
proposed
below
grade
next
slide.
Please
for
the
parking
Supply
The
Proposal
complies
with
the
zoning
bylon.
There
are
eight
parking
spaces
provided
one
for
each
principal
dwelling.
There
are
no
parking
spaces
provided
for
the
secondary
dwelling
units.
None
are
required
by
the
Bari
law
and
there
are
also
zero
visitor
parking
spaces.
None
are
required
by
the
bylaw.
S
Next
slide,
please,
when
you're,
increasing
density
I
find
waste
management
is
an
area
that
has
to
be
addressed
in
this
proposal
is
providing
two
areas
for
Waste
Management
and
the
front
unit
is
going
to
be
inside
the
building
and
then
in
the
rear
unit.
It's
going
to
be
attached
to
the
building
next
slide,
please.
S
So.
In
conclusion,
the
recommendation
before
you
today
is
to
prove
the
zoning
bylaw
Amendment
for
1568
Meadowbrook
Road
from
residential
first
density
ww
to
residential
second
density,
Sub,
Zone
N
and
with
an
urban
exception,
and
this
will
permit
four
long,
semi-detached
buildings
consisting
of
16
dwelling
units
a
principal
and
eight
secondary
dwelling
units
next
slide.
Please
thank
you
and
I'd
be
happy
to
answer
questions.
A
T
Does
it
still
flush
red
there?
You
go
different
perspective
that
I'm
that
I'm
used
to
and
we're
really
excited
to
be
here.
It's
it's
been
a
long
road
for
us.
We've
started
this
back
in
May
2021.
If
you
can
believe
that
our
application
was
deemed
complete
in
February
2022
and
it's
May
2023
and
we're
happy
to
be
here
at
at
plan
committee,
I,
won't
repeat
the
presentation
or
any
of
the
the
details
of
the
presentation
that
was
just
made.
It
was
very
comprehensive.
T
It
was
actually
very
good.
I
will
apologize
for
the
small
typo
in
our
well,
it's
quite
a
large
typo.
In
our
our
presentation.
It
is
1568,
not
1598.,
but
what?
What
I
think
if
you
could
go
to
slide
number
four?
What
I
think
is
important
to
understand
is
a
little
bit
of
the
of
the
community
context.
What
we're
really
doing
here
is
introducing
a
little
bit
of
a
different
typology
to
that
particular
area.
You
can
see
to
the
left.
We
have
townhouses
to
the
right.
T
We
have
a
large
ranch
style
Bungalow.
You
can
ignore
the
front
yard
parking,
because
I
don't
think
that
that's
allowed
but
and
across
the
street
is
where
you
start
to
see
the
R2
End
Zone
and
you
start
to
see
different
typologies.
So
what
we're
really
just
doing
is
bringing
what's
happening
across
the
street
to
the
other.
The
other
side
of
the
street,
which
is
it,
is
a
major
collector
on
your
road
Network.
T
So
it's
really
where
you
should
see
some
of
those
new
topologies
coming
into
into
play,
and
so
what
we,
when
we
looked
at
this,
we
looked
at
the
three
unit
option
or
the
the
as
of
as
of
right
option.
But
when
we
started
to
see
what
was
happening
around
the
neighborhood
and
and
developments
that
were
occurring,
it
looked.
It
was
presented
to
us
as
as
a
perfect
opportunity
to
bring
a
different
topology
to
a
major
collector,
very
close
to
Transit
and
in
keeping
with
your
your
official
plan.
T
T
But
what
we
were
when
we
looked
at
it,
we
looked
at
on
a
low
rise
of
primeability
and
said:
you
know
it's
really
not
appropriate
for
the
site.
We
can't
get
the
the
appropriate
transitions.
So
what
we
went.
What
we
ultimately
brought
forward
was
a
very
similar
presents
as
a
single
family
home
two
stories
limited
access.
We
provided
the
appropriate
parking
for
for
the
site,
so
we
think
it
fits
well
into
the
broader
Community
context.
T
So,
if
I
can
go
to
the
next,
the
next
slide
and
sort
of
that's
a
that's
a
visual
picture
that
gives
you
you
know
the
sights
down
at
the
left
hand
corner
you,
walk
up
the
street
and
then
up
a
a
nice
linear
parquet
to
well.
It's
not
a
parquet,
but
a
linear
walking
trail
to
the
entrance
to
the
transit,
Bridge,
750
meters.
It's
an
easy
walk.
You
can
walk
down
the
the
side
street
brings
you
to
protective
Pathways
and
I.
Note
I,
just
noted
for
you.
T
You
know
when
we
talk
about
introducing
new
topologies
on
a
side
street
there
on
on
Maxime
you're,
exactly
what's
being
proposed
on
your
major
collector
is
happening
on
your
side
streets.
So
there's
that's
an
eight
unit
development
to
long
semi
buildings,
that's
happening
so
from
a
from
a
community
context
where
you're
really
seeing
an
introduction
of
of
this
new
typology
there.
So
it's
it's
not
something
that
is
new
or
in
fact
undesirable
in
in
the
community
and
Mr
chair
in
I'll.
T
A
T
T
Well,
most
of
the
parking
is
covered
parking,
so
you
pull
into
the
laneway
and
you'd
turn
to
into
covered
parking
spaces.
There
is
some
area,
small
areas
which
you're
going
to
be
able
to
believe
leave
snow,
but
it's
going
to
be
no
different
than
it
is.
If
you
had
a
single
family
home
with
well,
it's
not
a
single
family
home
anymore
right,
it's!
It
would
be.
You
know
a
three
unit
building
there
with
a
with
a
driveway.
What's
interesting
here
is
that
we're
sharing
driveways.
T
So,
as
you
saw
in
the
staff
presentation
you
could
have
as
of
right,
three
driveways
onto
the
street
and
what
you're
getting
here
is
two
driveways
a
much
smaller.
In
fact,
that
staff
were
very
good
at
creating
a
driveways
and
walkways
to
the
the
back
units.
So
that's
the
that's
I
think
it's
a
better
presentation
at
the
street
than
the
option,
which
is
the
the
three
unit
complying
or
the
three
singles
Lots
complying.
So.
U
Okay,
well
I'll
wait
to
hear
from
the
delegation
that
is
speaking
today,
but
I
I
think
we
all
understand
the
sensitivity
of
this
one
because
of
the
fact,
unlike
somewhere,
like
telesoc
Court,
where
it's
our
literally
beside
Transit,
there's
a
very
beautiful
Bungalows.
Next
to
it
and
I
know,
character
of
community
holds
no
value
and
reality,
but
this
is
a
bit
more
of
a
challenge.
So
I
do
appreciate
the
time
that
you've
spent
going
back
and
forth
and
working
with
the
Community
Association,
adding
in
the
trees.
U
I
think
that
is
very
important,
but
this
is
a
little
more
sensitive
than
a
typical
file
and
you
know
I'm
pretty
Pro
development
when
it
comes
to
intensification,
but
this
one
is
not
not
the
same.
The
the
regular
same
kind
of
a
file
that's
going
in
but
I
do
recognize
that
this
is
where
the
city
is
going
in
the
future.
So
thank
you
very
much
for
coming
out
and
making
a
delegation
today.
Peter.
T
Yeah,
just
just
to
add
the
the
present,
the
form
you
see
on
on
today
is
not
the
form
that
was
submitted
with
the
application,
so
in
the
back
and
forth
with
staff,
several
changes
were
made.
The
front
units
got
smaller,
the
the
walkways
were
added,
so
the
separation
between
the
units
got
got
bigger
and
those
were
directives
that
or
things
that
happen,
the
back
and
forth
between
staff.
So
what
you're
seeing
today
is
an
evolution
to
what
was
originally
provided.
U
And
and
I
completely
concur.
I
I
was
hoping
to
tease
that
out
and
also
with
the
good
work
of
our
Pineview
Community
Association,
that
that
was
a
a
pretty
heated
discussion
we
had,
but
but
at
the
same
time,
I
think
that
you
recognize
the
sensitivity
of
this.
So
I'll
wait
for
the
next
delegation.
But
again
thanks
for
coming
out
today,
Peter.
A
V
Thank
you
very
much.
My
name
is
Paul
and
I'm.
I
reside
at
1408,
Ridge,
Brook
Drive,
actually
I'm
the
the
house
in
question
that
the
login
question
from
my
actually
kitchen
window
I
can
see
the
house
I've
been
here
40
years,
and
it's
if
I
want
to
say
good
neighbors
I've
had
good
neighbors,
it's
a
very
good
neighborhood
here,
and
actually
we
just
besided.
V
Now
it's
going
to
be
I,
don't
know
if
there's
16
units
I
I,
don't
know
it's
going
to
be
at
least
one
car
per
unit,
maybe
more
because
most
people
have
one
or
two
or
three
cars
nowadays.
So
again,
as
I'm
I'm
right
I'm
right
beside
the
the
unit,
you
know
I'm
on
actually
I'm
a
townhouse
on
Ridge,
Brook
Drive,
but
I'm
again
I'm.
V
My
my
unit
is
east
of
the
of
the
the
the
single
housing
question
here
on
it
so
I
to
me
personally
it
it's
it's
it.
I
would
be
so
many
new
peoples
over
there.
So
the
noise
I
know
that
right
now,
there's
one
unit
and
it's
going
to
be
I,
don't
know
if
that's
16
units
in
all
but
anyways,
it's
it's.
Certainly
it's
probably
going
to
be
about
I.
Don't
know
30
40,
more
people
there.
So
that's
that's
going
to
create
more
more
noise.
V
I
know
it
might
create
like
the
street
ahead.
Is
Orel
and
I.
Think
they're
going
to
come
out.
I,
don't
know
the
parking's
come
on,
but
I
think
on
the
on
right
now
in
Middlebrook,
it's
people
are
parking
on
Meadowbrook
and
it's
geez.
It's
almost
like
I,
don't
park
in
Middleburg.
I
have
my
own
parking
here,
but
Meadowbrook
lots
of
people
are
parking
on
Meadowbrook
and
it's
usually
it's
very
difficult
to
get
a
people's,
not
me,
but
people
that
I
sometimes
can't
get
any
parking.
V
So
imagine
with
I,
don't
know
16
or
whatever
how
many
more
cars
that's
going
to
create.
Certainly
more
parking
problems
on
it
and
I
guess
our
neighborhood
is
a
is,
is
always
being
again,
I
mean
40
years
here
and
I've.
Only
really
it's
a
great
it's
a
great
neighborhood.
It's
very
quiet,
but
I
find
it
right
now,
I
think
with
this
new
project.
It's
it's.
Certainly
it's
going
to
create,
certainly
more
noise,
and
might
it
could
be
more
pollution.
V
Also
and
again,
I
will
not
be,
for
example,
I'm
I'm
in
my
kitchen
right
now,
I'm
looking
at
it
right
now
and
it
they'll
build
I
am
about
20
feet
away,
20
feet
from
the
fence,
so
there's
going
to
be
a
new
unit.
I
won't
be
it's
going
to
block
my
view.
But
again
this
is
secondary,
but
I
I
find
that
with
the
so
many
people
in
a
you
know,
I
wouldn't
mind
if
they
but
I.
V
I,
don't
know
it's
again:
I'm
I'm
all
for
development,
but
you
know:
we've
had
so
much
quiet,
I've
been
so
so
blessed
here
with
so
many
good,
neighbors
and
so
and
and
quiet.
So
now
is
going
to
be
more
more
people
and
I.
Guess
more
traffic,
more
Norse
I,
don't
know
more
pollution,
maybe
on
it
on
it.
So
again,
I
I,
I
I'd.
V
Rather
you
know
if
I
I
load
the
old
zoning
you
know
which
which
prepared
I
guess
and
on
that
lot
would
probably
be
two
or
three
ounces.
That
I
don't
mind
that,
but
more
than
that
would
be
certainly
a
little
too
I,
don't
know
quite
a
bit
noise
and
everything
else
and
on
it
and
again
I
I.
You
know
it's.
It's
like
I
have
no
no
problem
with
investors,
I
think,
but
I
think
that
most
people
like
to
make
a
little
bit
more
money
anyway.
This
is
my
view.
V
I'm
again
I've
been
here
40
years
and
I
I've
talked
to
quite
a
few
of
my
neighbors
I
know
originally
I
went
around
and
that
was
24
of
them
originally
that
you
know
phoned
in
or
I,
don't
know,
I
know
right
now,
probably
they're
not
there,
but
we're
against
it.
So
this
is
basically
my
view
and
I
again
I.
Thank
you
for
listening
to
me
and
again,
no
whatever
happens
happens,
but
let's
hope
for
the
best
here
so
again,
I
I.
Thank
you
very
much.
U
U
I
also
did
make
sure
that
that
yourself
and
the
neighbor
Andre
are
aware
of
your
options.
This
isn't
the
end
of
the
road.
There's
always
an
option
to
be
able
to
go
ahead
and
challenge
this,
even
if
it
does
pass
today
and
I
do
in
my
calendar
that
we
have
a
phone
call
tomorrow
morning.
So
I'll
be
certain
to
have
that
discussion
with
you
again
with
your
neighbor
as
well.
So
I'm
I'm
very
happy
to
hear
that
you
showed
up
today,
but
I
will
be
speaking
with
you
again
tomorrow.
U
I
will
I
will
be
dissenting
on
this
item.
Folks,
not
because
I
don't
believe
in
intensification.
It's
just
there's
still
some
minor
issues
that
are
not
resolved,
and
hopefully
we
can
get
those
resolved
prior
to
council.
But
at
this
point
that's
my
position.
Paul
I
made
that
commitment
to
the
to
the
community
I
know
that
even
the
Pineview
Community
Association
has
done
great
work
on
getting
some
of
the
changes
done
and
put
in
place
at
the
same
time.
U
There's
still
those
outstanding
issues
on
parking,
snow,
loads
and
again
the
applicant
not
knowing
about
the
cycling
infrastructure,
creates
a
a
bit
of
a
challenge
for
me.
I,
don't
know
why
we're
not
linking
all
these
things
up
so
I
just
want
to
know.
I
wanted
you
to
know
Paul
where
my
head's
at
and
I'll
look
forward
to.
Speaking
to
you
tomorrow,.
A
F
It's
not
a
question,
it's
a
comment.
I
just
wanted
to
say:
I
appreciated,
seeing
the
Transit
contact
Section
of
the
report
and
I
thought
it
was
really
helpful
to
put
the
application
in
the
the
right,
the
right
context
and
it's
a
neighborhood
that
seems
to
be
very
well
connected
to
Transit.
So
thank
you
for
that.
A
Thank
you
very
much,
Vice
chair.
Are
there
any
other
questions
or
comments?
I'll
just
add
one
of
my
own,
which
is
when
I
take
a
look
at
the
the
size
of
these
Lots.
The
need
to
go
beyond
the
R1
zoning
is
is,
in
my
mind,
absolutely
critical.
We
are
all
getting
hammered
right
now,
with
pothole
complaints
and
pothole.
Complaints
get
worse
as
roads
are
not
maintained,
and
in
order
to
maintain
roads
and
keep
taxes
relatively
low,
we
have
to
have
density.
A
A
Ends
the
big
substantive
agenda,
the
remaining
items
on
the
list,
the
status
update
for
planning
and
housing
committee
inquiries
and
motions
for
the
period
ending
May
5th
2023
is
that
received?
Thank
you.
There
are
no
in-camera
items.
I
know.
Counselor
Lowe
has
made
a
request
to
lift
the
cashier
of
Parkland
item
from
the
information
previously
distributed.
Is
the
committee
amenable
to
that
lifting
yes,
very
much
counselor
low?
Please
proceed.
E
M
B
Mr,
chair
I'm,
not
sure
if
there's
anyone
from
Parks
planning
or
the
treasury
on
the
call
respectfully
Mr,
chair,
I,
don't
have
a
direct
answer
to
the
question,
but
I'm
happy
to
work
with
Finance
staff
or
Parks
planning
to
get
that
you
know
before
before
Council
and
make
sure
that
a
connection
with
counselor
low
is
made.
Thank.
A
N
N
Don't
want
to
sound
hypocritical
because,
in
my
ward,
I
face
the
same
type
of
opposition
to
very
reasonable
applications
and
where
I'm
going
with
this
statement
is,
as
I
said
during
the
official
plan
review
when
we
tackle
the
comprehensive
zoning
bylaw
review
I
believe
the
city
needs
to
be
very
clear
in
communicating
to
the
public.
What's
coming
with
respect
to
intensification
in
the
city,
we're
in
a
housing
and
homelessness
emergency,
we
need
all
types
of
new
housing.
We
have
400
000
more
people
coming
over
30
years.
N
Every
single
neighborhood
is
going
to
be
impacted
by
intensification
and
there's
a
disconnect
between
what's
coming
and
what
people
are
aware
of
and
what
people
are
willing
to
accept,
and
we
can't
have
major
battles
over
every
single
type
of
zoning
application
that
comes
before
us.
Yes,
the
public
has
the
right
to
speak.
Public
has
a
right
to
be
opposed,
but
I
think
we
can
mitigate
some
of
that
opposition
by
being
very
clear
and
reinforcing
in
the
public
with
the
public
about
what's
coming,
300
or
sorry,
400
000,
more
people
over
the
next
30
Years.
N
So
again,
I
just
want
to
plant
that
that,
as
we
go
through
the
zoning
bylaw
review
the
comprehensive
zoning
bylaw
review,
we
have
to
tell
that
story.
We
have
to
provide
the
public
that
context
and
why
we're
doing
this,
and
why
it's
why
intensification
is
good.
There
are
many
benefits
of
intensification
over
sprawl,
which
we
we
addressed
during
the
op
process.
N
U
Tierney
great,
thank
you
and
thank
you,
councilor
Brockington,
because
I
think
that
is
what
our
real
issue
is
and
I've
said
this
for
years.
As
a
matter
of
fact,
I'm
happy
to
hear
the
chair's
comments
that
he'll
be
very
supportive
of
all
applications
that
come
in
in
the
future.
I,
don't
think
that
was
necessarily
the
case
in
the
past,
and
we
have
to
make
sure
people
are
aware
with
the
new
bylaws
coming
in
that
is
going
to
affect
and
I've
said
this
many
times.
U
So
I
think
we
have
a
lot
of
work
to
do
ahead
of
us.
Mr
chair,
I,
think
you're
going
to
do
a
terrific
job
at
the
helm,
but
I
I
do
appreciate
Riley's
comments.
I
think
they
really
are
what
we're
all
feeling,
especially
inside
people,
keep
forgetting
I'm
inside
the
green
belt
I'm
inside
the
green
belt.
I
am
I
am
Urban,
so
you
know
I'm
seeing
a
lot
of
applications.
U
I
have
at
least
25
more
coming
in
and
I
know,
I'm
gonna
have
a
lot
of
pressures,
but
but
where
it
makes
sense
making
sure
we
still
answer
the
questions
for
our
constituents
is
very
critical.
It's
not
a
carte
blanche.
You
know
we're
not
going
to
ask
questions,
we're
going
to
make
sure
that
we
get
the
situations
that
are
of
concern
to
neighbors,
still
addressed
to
the
best
possible
way
we
can,
but
we
have
to
inform
everybody
that
this
is
the
new
reality.
There
is
going
to
be
intensification.
G
G
Think
density
gets
a
bad
rap
sometimes,
but
those
of
us
who
live
in
communities
closer
to
our
neighbors
really
benefit
from
the
connections
and
the
Community
Development
that
happens
from
learning
to
live
with
other
people
and
making
space
for
other
people,
and
you
can
see
from
the
balance
in
my
caption
fun.
We
have
a
lot
of
towers
coming
to
my
ward
and
we're
running
out
of
land
downtown.
G
G
You
know
to
have
a
customer
base
for
that
service,
so
there's
a
lot
of
benefits
that
come
with
identification
that
moves
us
towards
the
15-minute
neighborhoods
that
so
many
people
want
so
I
also
want
to
say
thank
you
to
residents
of
other
Wards
as
you
get
used
to
this
process
and
get
used
to
living
with
more
people
near
you,
I
can
assure
you
it's
it's
generally,
a
very
good
thing
and
it's
the
thing
I
love
about
living
in
my
ward.
Thank
you.
Thank.
W
I
won't
belabor
the
point
too
much,
but
I
do
think
that
councilman
Brockington
brought
up
an
excellent
aspect
to
this.
That
communication
is
key
and
I
will
say
that
part
of
the
communication
has
to
include
the
new
limitations
on
our
role
as
counselors
and
the
community's
role
in
influencing
things
like
site
plan
applications.
You
know,
I
I
know.
We've
talked
about
this
at
length
before
that,
with
the
provincial
changes
to
the
legislation.
Some
of
the
files
that
we're
working
on
are
have
been
grandfathered.
W
They
may
have
come
in
before
this
legislation
and
we
have
more
of
a
say
on
it.
The
community
has
more
of
a
say
on
it
than
what
we
do
have
after
that
timeline
has
been
met,
so
I'm
facing
that
in
my
own
Community
I
have
one
property
that
was
done
prior
to
that
legislation
coming
in
totally
different
roles.
We're
now
involved
I
can
I
can
pull
delegated
authority.
W
We
can
bring
it
to
committee,
don't
know
if
I
will,
but
once
again
those
options
are
there
and
now
I'm
trying
to
communicate
to
my
residents
about
what
it
means
under
this
new
reality,
and
really
you
know
it's
up
to
the
developer
whether
they
want
to
have
a
meeting
if
they
so
there's
different
aspects.
That
I
think
the
community
really
does
need
to
understand.
It's
not
just
about
density,
it's
not
just
about
educating
those
pieces.
W
It's
also
about
the
limitations
placed
upon
us
by
the
provincial
government
to
our
ability
to
influence
or
to
amend
any
of
these,
maybe
more
so
lesser
dense
applications
that
don't
require
zoning
amendments
or
large-scale
amendments.
So
I
think
that
that
will
be
key
as
well
too.
Is
the
communications.
A
Thank
you
very
much.
Counselor
dudes
see
no
further
comments
on
this
topic.
We
are
next
going
to
meet
on
Tuesday
May
30th
for
a
joint
planning
and
housing
committee
and
Agricultural
and
Rural
Affairs
committee
meeting
I'll
check
to
see
whether
we're
going
to
do
that
here
or
in
Chambers
that'll,
be
in
Chambers
and
on
Wednesday
June
7
2023
we'll
have
our
next
regular
planning
and
housing
committee
meeting.